Build Your Own Arcade Controls Forum
Main => Main Forum => Topic started by: UCA on February 01, 2015, 03:28:29 pm
-
We're sticking a fork in this now. The board is locked. Congrats to the new board!
Alright alright alright - all the work is done for the 2014 UCAs. Voting will continue for the month but that's all on autopilot. Barring any photo changes from the builders we're left with a month before UCA kicks out a Winner's Announcement Thread and posts to the Hall of Fame Thread before going dormant for 9 or so months.
That said, while voting is still fresh in everyone's mind, let us take a mo' and discuss/recommend changes to the UCA process for the future. This year we had a lot of vocal feedback on on the way we should be doing things. That's great! That's the way is should be to help this event evolve and grow. Here's the deal, the UCA board is up for peer review. Le Chuck, DaOld Man, DrVenture, BobA, and Yotsuya are released from contract as of this posting.
Please post what you think went right, what you think went wrong, and what you would like to see changed for next year. There are no rules here, the UCAs don't belong to any individual. They belong to the community. It's up to next year's board to fix/maintain as they see fit.
So how are we picking a new board? Post your recommendations as to who should be on the UCA board. You can't nominate yourself and if nominated you have to publicly accept - silence is not consent. If you're nominated and you accept then presto-finito you're on the board. No voting thread, no rigaramole. Donkeskis. The fate of future UCAs is in your hands. This thread is yours, rules free. Speak your mind. Prior board members can continue to serve if someone recommends them and they accept. No limit on board members.
Once Voting is complete for this year's UCAs this thread will close once everyone announces that enough is enough. Once voting is complete for this year's UCAs the UCA UserID will send all the new board members an PM with the pertinents and from that moment forward they own it.
Come 2015 if there aren't UCAs then there aren't. If they rules are totally different they they are. We are here for you, the UCAs are yours. Take control.
-
Running tally.
Board Members:
Vigo
PBJ
ChanceKJ
Opt2Not
Malenko
Nephasth
Louis Tully - Provisional seat pending his return to the hobby
---------------------------------------------------------
Conditional Acceptance:
---------------------------------------------------------
Recommended not accepted:
Boba
DrVenture
---------------------------------------------------------
Declined:
Yotsuya
DaOld Man
Le Chuck
PL1
I nominate Malenko.
I nominate Vigo.
-
I want to publically thank LeChuck for all the work he's done on this the past 4 years. It was a pleasure serving on the board with you.
-
I'd also like to thank Le Chuck for the work he has put in to keep the UCA sorted out.
-
I'd be honored, but if certain other members were on the board I would have to reconsider. I know Im abrasive sometimes, and I also know that certain other members cant handle me. I don't think the UCA's would be the same without chucklehead at the helm, Yotsuya would be my #2 pick, and Neph would be a close 3rd, Vigo and even closer 4th.
-
Although not necessary, I would like to endorse both Malenko and Vigo as board members.
And if anyone is thinking about it, I would respectfully ask that you not nominate me for the UCA Board. If nominated, I won't accept. Thank you.
-
I don't think the UCA's would be the same without chucklehead at the helm
The irony of that statement is paled only by my appreciation for the kudos from you and others.
-
I feel like I'm late to this party and there is a lot of innuendo that is blowing over my head. So I'm not sure what to say other than if the behind the scenes "sausage making" of this process is difficult that is unfortunate. That being said I'm very happy with the outward result and would like to see it run in a similar fashion going forward. The UCA's add much to our hobby and this forum in particular. Thanks again to the current board.
-
I feel like I'm late to this party and there is a lot of innuendo that is blowing over my head. So I'm not sure what to say other than if the behind the scenes "sausage making" of this process is difficult that is unfortunate. That being said I'm very happy with the outward result and would like to see it run in a similar fashion going forward. The UCA's add much to our hobby and this forum in particular. Thanks again to the current board.
Let me be clear - I've decided not to serve again because I feel like it's time for some fresh blood. Nothing more. The other board members have a been a joy. But like Chuckles said, this is the community's award, so let some of the other community members have a turn, especially those who have other ideas on how it should be run. :cheers:
-
I'd also like to thank Le Chuck for the work he has put in to keep the UCA sorted out.
Seconded. Awesome work.
D
-
.
-
Thanks to LeChuck and all the other board members. Its been a good stretch, but I agree it's time to hand over the reins.
I trust who ever takes it over will do a fine job.
-
Same boat as Malenko, depends who else is on board. Right now, I've got no complaints against those who have been mentioned.
-
Gents, 2nd post in this thread will track more or less the state of the board as it develops.
I appreciate the votes of confidence from Malenko that has been echoed by others but I'm with Yots and DaOld Man. I'm declining, looking forward to seeing how it develops tho!
@Ken - based on your above comments about about the reins I put you down as a decline. Let me know if you want that changed.
-
I just want to thank the current board members who did an amazing job! I think the UCA's are perfect the way they are, the rules are clear and the categories are just fine.
-
+1 on the thanks to the current board members for their outstanding work. :applaud:
Since the membership of the UCA board is about to change, it might be a good idea to list all the behind-the-scenes duties that board members perform so any prospective nominees know what they are getting themselves into and benefit from the lessons learned over the last four years.
Is there a "continuity book" like this?
If not, can the current board make one before the reins are passed to the next board?
Scott
-
Is there a "continuity book" like this?
Naw, we're going for a total retcon/reboot here. :cheers:
-
The committee has been awesome this year, and I think the results speak for themselves. :applaud: :applaud: :applaud:
And I have to say, I am very honored by the nominations. Sure, count me in for the next rodeo. I accept. No guarantees I could handle it nearly on the level of the 2014 team, but this is the least something I can do to give back to the community.
-
Right. So pretty much around Nov or so we start sending PMs to eachother that say things like, "Hey, are you still in this year?" and "Imma open me a thread that lets people know we're off to the races" and "These are last year's categories (primary ones) everybody good with that?" and finally "These are last years rules, everything hunky-dorey?"
Once we get a north-south from most everyone someone takes it on their part to copy and past from last years stuff, change the dates as applicable, and post up the new threads. Since its all saved in perpetuity in the UCA logged posts it's there.
Then a someone, usually not a board member, recommends to change the way of things after we're already rolling. PMs fly like wildfire between those that are interested enough to care about that sort of thing, and a general consensus of a position is more of less reached. At that point everyone collectively realizes they are taking this all a bit too seriously and feels a bit sheepish. All of this is within ten days of the nom thread opening. After the initial ten days nothing will happen for the rest of the nom period, including additional nominations.
During the first ten days board members take it in part to serve as ballot counter, truth sayer, thread browser, category decider, and general busy bodies to ensure the thread is more or less kept generally up to date.
One of the board members, whoever has self identified as having too much skin the game to back out, begins trawling the list of noms for pics and links as a lot of users can't be troubled with doing so when they make their nominations. This is the nature of the beast. Other board members will usually feel sorry for this chump saintly fellow and contribute helpful lists of links by category, or general words of encouragement like, "Do the thing, score the points!" or "Wow, that work sure does look like work!"
After assembling the list it's another copy and past job from last year's thread, then a post-a-thon to get everything up. It takes a morning at this point.
Really it comes down to the desire to keep this thing alive, do what you and a few liked minded others think is "right" for the "community" and a willingness to put up with a lot of healthy debate which can, at large part of our own fault - or non of our own, devolve rapidly into internet slap-fighting.
After 4 years, I don't know if I'm right for the job - mostly because my willingness to have the conversation about the whys and wherefores has deadlined. I was right for it. The first year I was a tyrannical board of one calling the shots on my lonesome. The second year I called forth from the ether a team of unlikely compatriots to support and defend an idea worth of assache. The third I was a seasoned veteran, excited to take it to the next level, and the fourth I am a broken man, scared of his own shadow, crying out for the solace of anonymity and the soothing balm of apathy.
so.....
Who's up for it?! ::) ::) ::)
-
major respect to the old board. Thanks for putting up with my crap.
My feeling is that the structure of the categories needs to be revamped. The wildcard here is that we don't know what build types will be popular enough to make what categories to vote on.
As an example, we have two really good pins this year that have to go up against the likes of Blip and a phenomenal driving cab. That almost seems unfair. It is what it is. And I'm not going to debate how this year went because it's in the bag now. But Im confident there is a different approach that may be an improvement.
-
I was hyped when this years threads came out, maybe a little overzealous. I hope people keep doing it. This is a good thing. Thanks fellas.
All in all, I would have liked to see more of the newer members come out to nominate.
I didn't see him named, but Scott the Bot / PL1 seems like a natural, quick with technical details, on top of the wiki and he is a moderator.
Just out of curiosity, is this the first time the Board has been up for nominations?
-
Well, now it's out there....
The board "worked" because we DID debate things and worked to a consensus. For example, even this year, I made the argument more than once that the MK-II Pod should be in the Non-Standard category (when it existed). However, it was clear that it fit as being defined as a "racer', and therefore was an upright. After no wailing and gnashing of the teeth, and more importantly, no butt-hurt, it stayed where it fit within the rules. I'm fine with that - I was the "stickler for the rules" member, mainly because the criteria was clearly out there for everyone to see. But as a board, no one got mad, no one forced an agenda, and it worked just fine.
In my opinion, the whole point of these awards is to recognize excellence. That was the approach I took, and I feel most of the board members saw it the same way. "Hey, that's pretty cool" is not the same as "Man, that's outstanding."
Looking forward to seeing how it evolves. :cheers:
-
Just out of curiosity, is this the first time the Board has been up for nominations?
Yes. <edit to add background> the first board was chosen by me because I wanted to separate the UCAs from me. I can't very well get in internet cat fights with X2 and whoever else if I'm having to keep a good rep for the comp every year so Saint, who so loved the hobby, gave forth the UCA avatar so that it could be the beacon of shininess. I called up users that 1) Were routinely active 2) Had history 3) Were universally more respected than myself 4) Had shown themselves to be team players. This is how the leopard got its spots.
Scott the Bot, you've been nominated. What say you?
But Im confident there is a different approach that may be an improvement.
Sounds like a veiled request for a shot at the big time. I nominate ChanceKJ.
-
As an example, we have two really good pins this year that have to go up against the likes of Blip and a phenomenal driving cab.
Thanks ::)
-
Oh, and here's a suggestion - I'd like to see a cap on how many projects you can nominate in one category. Neph said it best - you should only nominate things you would ACTUALLY use your vote on. Otherwise, give them kudos in their project thread.
-
As an example, we have two really good pins this year that have to go up against the likes of Blip and a phenomenal driving cab. That almost seems unfair.
Well, the rules as currently constructed, as used for the past four years, say "three noms in a category to make the voting rounds". So if they weren't in the upright category, there wouldn't be a chance to vote on them at all. :dunno
-
Oh, and here's a suggestion - I'd like to see a cap on how many projects you can nominate in one category. Neph said it best - you should only nominate things you would ACTUALLY use your vote on. Otherwise, give them kudos in their project thread.
Did we discuss that, I know you had brought it up, I thought about having 7 noms/user. That's 7 total. So 7 new projects nominated or 3 new noms, two 2nds, and 2 thirds. That kind of thing. Basically a holy rolling pain in the kiester of which to keep track.
No idea if that's a good idea or not. I'm against it on several levels and for it on just one or two. Most user, the vast majority, nominated less than that number. A few were into double digits. I think it all worked out okay in the end. We have a great field of builds this year. A bit thick IMO, some of them I wouldn't have sent to the final thread, but that's why it's a community call.
As an example, we have two really good pins this year that have to go up against the likes of Blip and a phenomenal driving cab. That almost seems unfair.
Well, the rules as currently constructed, as used for the past four years, say "three noms in a category to make the voting rounds". So if they weren't in the upright category, there wouldn't be a chance to vote on them at all. :dunno
Which is the whole reason we're here. Four years, schmore years. If the new board reads the community and sees the need for change then it'll change. The only real issue for the board is determining what direction the community recommends (tricky and fickle) and what direction that member personally would like to see - and then resolving the two.
-
Sounds like a veiled request for a shot at the big time. I nominate ChanceKJ.
So, yeah he's one of my deal breakers. If hes in , I'm out.
-
If it wasn't for rules, we'd just be savages. We aren't at the county fair, not everyone is going to get a ribbon.
I wonder if anyone has been nominated and was like "Holy ---steaming pile of meadow muffin---, I didn't ask for that this!? Someone linked me here from imgur & I just thought I'd post my project."
On the other hand, there should be a gate. Another subforum if you will, that gets opened in the last quarter of the forth quarter where people can submit their details as is done on the wiki, perhaps a parts list, and a build diagram or an exhaustive build log for everyone to see. Effectively saying, "I would like to be considered for your award show and here is why."
Otherwise, if the original builder isn't into this level on inspection, we are rubber necking peeping toms.
-
Sounds like a veiled request for a shot at the big time. I nominate ChanceKJ.
So, yeah he's one of my deal breakers. If hes in , I'm out.
PL1 is one of mine, so... We'll see how this goes...
-
If it wasn't for rules, we'd just be savages. We aren't at the county fair, not everyone is going to get a ribbon.
I wonder if anyone has been nominated and was like "Holy ---steaming pile of meadow muffin---, I didn't ask for that this!? Someone linked me here from imgur & I just thought I'd post my project."
On the other hand, there should be a gate. Another subforum if you will, that gets opened in the last quarter of the forth quarter where people can submit their details as is done on the wiki, perhaps a parts list, and a build diagram or an exhaustive build log for everyone to see. Effectively saying, "I would like to be considered for your award show and here is why."
Otherwise, if the original builder isn't into this level on inspection, we are rubber necking peeping toms.
That happened. First or second year. Jkdubb, the guy with the sweetass cocktail. He was totally a fly by. There was another one as well. Can't remember who. Anyway, both were extremely surprised and pleased. Have yet to get a negative reaction. One user declined a trophy and doesn't think that highly of some parts of this forum but was still pleased with the outcome.
All that other stuff you said sounds like a lot of work.
-
(http://i.imgur.com/YI29u5n.gif)
-
All that other stuff you said sounds like a lot of work.
But all done on the builders part, not the board. When I went through the list of all the projects, and there was a chance I missed some, many, were mine & like mine. Half starts, false starts and everything in between. Personally reviewing the posts to find qualified nominees; self identifying as a finished project within the prescribed timeline, was an adventure. Let alone determining if they were contenders.
But that was fun too. Anyway, this whole thing has been fun.
-
I didn't see him named, but Scott the Bot / PL1 seems like a natural, quick with technical details, on top of the wiki and he is a moderator.
Scott the Bot, you've been nominated. What say you?
Thank you for your kind consideration, but my reply is the same as Sherman's.
If nominated, I will not run; if elected, I will not serve.
Good luck to all who end up serving on the 2015 UCA board. :cheers:
Scott
-
Oh, and here's a suggestion - I'd like to see a cap on how many projects you can nominate in one category. Neph said it best - you should only nominate things you would ACTUALLY use your vote on. Otherwise, give them kudos in their project thread.
Did we discuss that, I know you had brought it up, I thought about having 7 noms/user. That's 7 total. So 7 new projects nominated or 3 new noms, two 2nds, and 2 thirds. That kind of thing. Basically a holy rolling pain in the kiester of which to keep track.
No idea if that's a good idea or not. I'm against it on several levels and for it on just one or two. Most user, the vast majority, nominated less than that number. A few were into double digits. A bit thick IMO, some of them I wouldn't have sent to the final thread, but that's why it's a community call. I think it all worked out okay in the end. We have a great field of builds this year.
It was suggested to me by a few users. I agree that tracking it would be a pain, but I also think it would help thin the herd, so to speak. At one point, if I remember, one user had made over 20 nominations alone. I'd like to see more users participate with one vote and nominate what they like than two or three people nominating everything under the sun. But I agree, tracking it would be a bear.
As an example, we have two really good pins this year that have to go up against the likes of Blip and a phenomenal driving cab. That almost seems unfair.
Well, the rules as currently constructed, as used for the past four years, say "three noms in a category to make the voting rounds". So if they weren't in the upright category, there wouldn't be a chance to vote on them at all. :dunno
Which is the whole reason we're here. Four years, schmore years. If the new board reads the community and sees the need for change then it'll change. The only real issue for the board is determining what direction the community recommends (tricky and fickle) and what direction that member personally would like to see - and then resolving the two.
I have no problem changing the rules - I have a problem changing them once things start. If the rules need to be changed, it should happen afterwards... like how we're doing now.
:cheers:
-
And all that jazz
:cheers: :cheers:
-
And all that jazz
:cheers: :cheers:
Ain't my bizness no mo'!!!!
:gobama :duckhunt :gobama
-
(http://i.imgur.com/YI29u5n.gif)
haha! +1 :laugh:
-
Sounds like a veiled request for a shot at the big time. I nominate ChanceKJ.
(http://i.imgur.com/YI29u5n.gif)
haha! +1 :laugh:
When you are done with your popcorn...
-
On the other hand, there should be a gate. Another subforum if you will, that gets opened in the last quarter of the forth quarter where people can submit their details as is done on the wiki, perhaps a parts list, and a build diagram or an exhaustive build log for everyone to see. Effectively saying, "I would like to be considered for your award show and here is why."
Interesting, Eric. I like the fact that all projects are nominated by members. It's a community award recognizing the work of community members. This quote by Gregg Popovich regarding the 2015 All-Star games reminds me of this. He takes umbrages with self-promotion:
“We got some interesting things in the mail from people who are politicking for their guys. And for everybody who sent me something, I just want them to know it immediately went in the trash can. Such pandering is embarrassing. We got it from several places and it immediately went in the trash can. We make sure we look to see who did not send us humiliating little political packages of propaganda. We cross (those who did) off the list right away.”
Basically, let their play speak for the player. If they deserve to be an all-star, they should be an all-star. Lots of guys having good years don't get in. If the community thinks the player (or in our case, the project) is deserving of accolades, they'll earn it. Self-promoting (and it DOES happen) is, like Pop says, embarrassing.
I dunno, just an observation. :cheers:
-
Oh, by the way, did Janeane Garafalo ever get a nom for anything?
-
Oh, by the way, did Janeane Garafalo ever get a nom for anything?
She got secondthirded by five of the four members.
-
Oh, by the way, did Janeane Garafalo ever get a nom for anything?
She got secondthirded by five of the four members.
I'd settle with getting to either of those bases with her.
-
.
-
Sounds like a veiled request for a shot at the big time. I nominate ChanceKJ.
(http://i.imgur.com/YI29u5n.gif)
haha! +1 :laugh:
When you are done with your popcorn...
Mmmm, yes. I'll let you know as soon as I'm done privately working out any beef a couple of people may or may not have with me first.
...that and I actualy want real popcorn right now. Hmmm
-
Oh, by the way, did Janeane Garafalo ever get a nom for anything?
She got secondthirded by five of the four members.
Naughty Naughty!
(http://images.wikia.com/austinpowers/images/4/4b/Austin3b.jpg)
-
On the other hand, there should be a gate. Another subforum if you will, that gets opened in the last quarter of the forth quarter where people can submit their details as is done on the wiki, perhaps a parts list, and a build diagram or an exhaustive build log for everyone to see. Effectively saying, "I would like to be considered for your award show and here is why."
Interesting, Eric. I like the fact that all projects are nominated by members. It's a community award recognizing the work of community members. This quote by Gregg Popovich regarding the 2015 All-Star games reminds me of this. He takes umbrages with self-promotion:
“We got some interesting things in the mail from people who are politicking for their guys. And for everybody who sent me something, I just want them to know it immediately went in the trash can. Such pandering is embarrassing. We got it from several places and it immediately went in the trash can. We make sure we look to see who did not send us humiliating little political packages of propaganda. We cross (those who did) off the list right away.”
Basically, let their play speak for the player. If they deserve to be an all-star, they should be an all-star. Lots of guys having good years don't get in. If the community thinks the player (or in our case, the project) is deserving of accolades, they'll earn it. Self-promoting (and it DOES happen) is, like Pop says, embarrassing.
I dunno, just an observation. :cheers:
First of, that is silly. Tell me what about this isn't self promotion? The UCA aside, the project announcement forum would disagree with that stance.
Ok, let me say it this way. Some people do a less than stellar job of documenting (or in my case completing) their project. I'd like a kinder, gentler way to persuade folks to submitting fully documented project. If being part of a competition at the end is what takes them to do it, let that be the thing that gets it done.
-
On the other hand, there should be a gate. Another subforum if you will, that gets opened in the last quarter of the forth quarter where people can submit their details as is done on the wiki, perhaps a parts list, and a build diagram or an exhaustive build log for everyone to see. Effectively saying, "I would like to be considered for your award show and here is why."
Interesting, Eric. I like the fact that all projects are nominated by members. It's a community award recognizing the work of community members. This quote by Gregg Popovich regarding the 2015 All-Star games reminds me of this. He takes umbrages with self-promotion:
“We got some interesting things in the mail from people who are politicking for their guys. And for everybody who sent me something, I just want them to know it immediately went in the trash can. Such pandering is embarrassing. We got it from several places and it immediately went in the trash can. We make sure we look to see who did not send us humiliating little political packages of propaganda. We cross (those who did) off the list right away.”
Basically, let their play speak for the player. If they deserve to be an all-star, they should be an all-star. Lots of guys having good years don't get in. If the community thinks the player (or in our case, the project) is deserving of accolades, they'll earn it. Self-promoting (and it DOES happen) is, like Pop says, embarrassing.
I dunno, just an observation. :cheers:
First of, that is silly. Tell me what about this isn't self promotion? The UCA aside, the project announcement forum would disagree with that stance.
The Project Annoucnement forum was suggested as a way to make it easier for people to find projects, not submit yourself to the UCAs. You don't HAVE to submit anything in there to be nominated. It's a nice side result of it (like using MAME to play video games, not just documenting hardware), but that's not why that thread exists.
Ok, let me say it this way. Some people do a less than stellar job of documenting (or in my case completing) their project. I'd like a kinder, gentler way to persuade folks to submitting fully documented project. If being part of a competition at the end is what takes them to do it, let that be the thing that gets it done.
Yeah, sure, but I still agree with Pop on the motivation of saying "HEY, HERE, I'M DONE! NOMINATE ME!". I'm not saying it's wrong, if that's what motivates people, then go for it, I'm saying I find that kind of pandering embarrassing.
-
I think a better example are people who nominate themselves for the hall of fame here with fairly crummy projects.
-
I think that the best thing about the UCA's is that they are unrequested praise. The minute people open project threads, they are opening the door to receiving praise for their work. Asking to be nominated beyond that, even in the smallest sense would only cheapen the awards. This isn't Instructables, we are not pimping our work out to try to win a 3d printer.
I do think there is a place for an easier channel to see what has been accomplished. I would be all for promoting the wiki and the "I finished my project" threads as good source material for nomination material, but don't think any steps other than completing your project and having a project thread should be required.
I also have been mulling over the nomination thing. My current train of thought is have a limit, but make it expandable. Something like You can 2nd or 3rd as much as you want, but new nominations are limited to 3. For every nomination you make that gets 3rded, you are granted another nomination. In theory, you would be able to have infinite nominations, granted that your prior nominations are confirmed as having merit by at least 2 peers.
-
I think that the best thing about the UCA's is that they are unrequested praise. The minute people open project threads, they are opening the door to receiving praise for their work. Asking to be nominated beyond that, even in the smallest sense would only cheapen the awards. This isn't Instructables, we are not pimping our work out to try to win a 3d printer.
I do think there is a place for an easier channel to see what has been accomplished. I would be all for promoting the wiki and the "I finished my project" threads as good source material for nomination material, but don't think any steps other than completing your project and having a project thread should be required.
I also have been mulling over the nomination thing. My current train of thought is have a limit, but make it expandable. Something like You can 2nd or 3rd as much as you want, but new nominations are limited to 3. For every nomination you make that gets 3rded, you are granted another nomination. In theory, you would be able to have infinite nominations, granted that your prior nominations are confirmed as having merit by at least 2 peers.
(https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/6c/50/22/6c50223fd076eb3c114e4657ee1a7217.jpg)
-
I also have been mulling over the nomination thing. My current train of thought is have a limit, but make it expandable. Something like You can 2nd or 3rd as much as you want, but new nominations are limited to 3. For every nomination you make that gets 3rded, you are granted another nomination. In theory, you would be able to have infinite nominations, granted that your prior nominations are confirmed as having merit by at least 2 peers.
We're pretty close on this. I think a member should only be able to nominate 1 project per category, but be able to 2nd and 3rd as many other nominations as they want. Gets more people involved in the nomination process...
-
Oh, and PBJ is so full UCA ideas every year, he should be forced to sit on the board at least once. :cheers:
-
@ yot - Yep, we are 100% on the same page. :cheers:
I also have been mulling over the nomination thing. My current train of thought is have a limit, but make it expandable. Something like You can 2nd or 3rd as much as you want, but new nominations are limited to 3. For every nomination you make that gets 3rded, you are granted another nomination. In theory, you would be able to have infinite nominations, granted that your prior nominations are confirmed as having merit by at least 2 peers.
We're pretty close on this. I think a member should only be able to nominate 1 project per category, but be able to 2nd and 3rd as many other nominations as they want. Gets more people involved in the nomination process...
I'd be totally fine with this, but the it might get confusing if we continue to do the shifting categories thing. We would also need to hammer out a plan if a project gets nominated in a category that we don't think it fits in. Do we negate the nomination, or move it to the right category, even if the person who nominated doesn't necessarily have an open nomination in that category? I also get the point of wanting to limit nominations out to one for multiple categories. I am pretty sure that is the norm for most award systems.
-
Oh, and PBJ is so full UCA ideas every year, he should be forced to sit on the board at least once. :cheers:
It would be an easy council to sit on. 1 category, people do whatever. Who cares if it ends up looking like a Dick Clark top 20 list.
I want to recommend Louis Tully, He has a pretty complete resume on different types of builds. I think he would have tons of insight.
-
Oh, and PBJ is so full UCA ideas every year, he should be forced to sit on the board at least once. :cheers:
I'd be happy to help.
-
.
-
Can someone confirm an assumption of mine? Currently the categories seem to be fluid and are finalized based on the number of and types of builds that are nominated and then confirmed by two other people. In other words if there are enough 3rd-ed nominations for a particular build type a new category can be created. In a nutshell is the current process?
-
Can someone confirm an assumption of mine? Currently the categories seem to be fluid and are finalized based on the number of and types of builds that are nominated and then confirmed by two other people. In other words if there are enough 3rd-ed nominations for a particular build type a new category can be created. In a nutshell is the current process?
Yes, pretty much.
-
Can someone confirm an assumption of mine? Currently the categories seem to be fluid and are finalized based on the number of and types of builds that are nominated and then confirmed by two other people. In other words if there are enough 3rd-ed nominations for a particular build type a new category can be created. In a nutshell is the current process?
Yes, pretty much.
Thanks. :cheers:
-
It seems to me the issue with number of nominations is tied to the issue of categories. I'm not sure how you limit the number of nominations if the categories are fixed. For example I nominated two cabinets for the same category this year. By the end of the nominations a new category had been created enabling me to vote for both cabinets that I nominated had I wished.
I like the current process and the leeway it gives the UCA to adjust the categories if need be. I also do not have an issue with people nominating multiple cabinets. As has been said before these things usually get sorted out in the voting. If the group feels there are too many final candidates perhaps an easy tweak to the process is to require more than two people to "second" a nomination.
-
It seems to me the issue with number of nominations is tied to the issue of categories. I'm not sure how you limit the number of nominations if the categories are fixed. For example I nominated two cabinets for the same category this year. By the end of the nominations a new category had been created enabling me to vote for both cabinets that I nominated had I wished.
I like the current process and the leeway it gives the UCA to adjust the categories if need be. I also do not have an issue with people nominating multiple cabinets. As has been said before these things usually get sort out in the voting. If the group feels therw13e are too many final candidates perhaps an easy tweak to the process is to require more than two people to "second" a nomination
That's why we expanded it to "thirded" this year.
To further expand on the process, it came out of the fact that when we had Full-Size and Small, at times you would see certain trends. One year it was bartops, this year it seems to be pedestals. Rather than have a huge category with like 11 builds, you could spin out a clear subset with that category, making two appropriately sized ones. I think 5 is probably the magic number, and this helps.
Some years, there aren't just enough builds for a specific category. Take this year, for instance. I proposed a bartop category because I was SURE with the amount of bartops built, we'd have deluge of them nominated. Turns out the community only thought there were TWO worth the vote-off. Now, by the rules, this would mean that NEITHER would have been voted on, because three are needed for a valid category, but we were able to spin of Pedestals into their own category and take the two bartops back into the Small Size catergory, where they will have a chance to be voted on. Same with the two pincabs. If we had a separate pincab catergory, neither would have made it to the voting round because the category would not have been valid. By folding them back into dedicated, at least they get voted on.
So I like the process because it is very organic and fluid, depending on what was popular the previous year. Maybe nezt year, it's Cabarets. Or Racers. Who knows?
-
I think we are saying the same thing because I like the flexibility of the current process as well.
Limiting the nominations is what I am struggling with. I just don't see it as that big of an issue. The process seems to sort itself out in the end. There is only one build in all the nominations that is questionable to me and even then it is borderline.
It seems to me the issue with number of nominations is tied to the issue of categories. I'm not sure how you limit the number of nominations if the categories are fixed. For example I nominated two cabinets for the same category this year. By the end of the nominations a new category had been created enabling me to vote for both cabinets that I nominated had I wished.
I like the current process and the leeway it gives the UCA to adjust the categories if need be. I also do not have an issue with people nominating multiple cabinets. As has been said before these things usually get sort out in the voting. If the group feels therw13e are too many final candidates perhaps an easy tweak to the process is to require more than two people to "second" a nomination
That's why we expanded it to "thirded" this year.
To further expand on the process, it came out of the fact that when we had Full-Size and Small, at times you would see certain trends. One year it was bartops, this year it seems to be pedestals. Rather than have a huge category with like 11 builds, you could spin out a clear subset with that category, making two appropriately sized ones. I think 5 is probably the magic number, and this helps.
Some years, there aren't just enough builds for a specific category. Take this year, for instance. I proposed a bartop category because I was SURE with the amount of bartops built, we'd have deluge of them nominated. Turns out the community only thought there were TWO worth the vote-off. Now, by the rules, this would mean that NEITHER would have been voted on, because three are needed for a valid category, but we were able to spin of Pedestals into their own category and take the two bartops back into the Small Size catergory, where they will have a chance to be voted on. Same with the two pincabs. If we had a separate pincab catergory, neither would have made it to the voting round because the category would not have been valid. By folding them back into dedicated, at least they get voted on.
So I like the process because it is very organic and fluid, depending on what was popular the previous year. Maybe nezt year, it's Cabarets. Or Racers. Who knows?
-
Or maybe try to encourage builders to add the word "Finished" or "Complete" or something to their project announcement thread title, that way it's an easy search?
Or maybe try to encourage builders to add their build to the 'completed' sticky, that way it's an easy search?
I did that four or five times, all of those builds are now in the thread.
-
Or maybe try to encourage builders to add the word "Finished" or "Complete" or something to their project announcement thread title, that way it's an easy search?
Or maybe try to encourage builders to add their build to the 'completed' sticky, that way it's an easy search?
I did that four or five times, all of those builds are now in the thread.
:cheers:
-
.
-
I mean, yeah... that works too. (http://www.latechbbb.com/forum/images/smilies/smiles/dunce.gif)
Or maybe try to encourage builders to add the word "Finished" or "Complete" or something to their project announcement thread title, that way it's an easy search?
Or maybe try to encourage builders to add their build to the 'completed' sticky, that way it's an easy search?
I did that four or five times, all of those builds are now in the thread.
:cheers:
So is you in or is you out, Tully?
-
.
-
So is you in or is you out, Tully?
Mmm...
Current status: Mulling
I think you should. Besides, you'll be reading BYOAC anyhow, right?
-
LT, I think you'd be great!
D
-
Work has kept me from keeping up on the boards like I prefer too lately.
Thank you to all the former board members, I think the awards are really fun.
LT, I also think you should join the board.
-
As we have a lot of undecideds sitting on the pot, I wanted to throw another name in the mix. I'd like to nominate Opt2Not to serve on the board. I think the board as a whole could benefit from his eye as an artist.
-
As we have a lot of undecideds sitting on the pot, I wanted to throw another name in the mix. I'd like to nominate Opt2Not to serve on the board. I think the board as a whole could benefit from his eye as an artist.
Thanks yots, I accept!
I'm on here daily, and I feel I bring a lot to the UCA table. :cheers:
-
great a ---smurfing--- canadian on the board? jk Opt2Not is muh boyyyyyyyy
I wonder if Im a deal breaker for anyone. If so, speak up
-
BobA was the token Canadian on the last board.
JK, BobA is a good dude. :cheers:
-
.
-
I wonder if Im a deal breaker for anyone. If so, speak up
I'm waiting for you to ---steaming pile of meadow muffin--- or get off the pot before I decide to ---steaming pile of meadow muffin--- or get off the pot...
-
BobA was the token Canadian on the last board.
Yeah but I'm West-coast Canadian...we're a bit different out here :afro:
(http://eafloe.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/westsideGRANNY.jpg)
-
Welcome aboard, Opt!
-
.
-
What's with all this "Do I Offend???" If you wanna be on the board, be on the board. Your goal is to make sure quality work gets rewarded, not making Peace in the Middle East. :angry:*
*That was a recreation of the evil yotsuya from Episode 30, "The Enemy Within".
-
I wonder if Im a deal breaker for anyone. If so, speak up
I'm waiting for you to ---steaming pile of meadow muffin--- or get off the pot before I decide to ---steaming pile of meadow muffin--- or get off the pot...
All jokes aside, I've got to ask the same.
Anyone waiting to commit based on whether I deuce or bail?
LT if YOU are someone's deal-breaker I'd rather not see them on the board. Just do it!
-
I wonder if Im a deal breaker for anyone. If so, speak up
I'm waiting for you to ---steaming pile of meadow muffin--- or get off the pot before I decide to ---steaming pile of meadow muffin--- or get off the pot...
All jokes aside, I've got to ask the same.
Anyone waiting to commit based on whether I deuce or bail?
LT if YOU are someone's deal-breaker I'd rather not see them on the board. Just do it!
That like button would be handy now.
I don't think there is much opportunity to offend anyone over any of this. I mean, who got offended over the lack of pinball builds? If so, PayPal me, I'll make sure you aren't offended. Same goes for driving cabs.
-
The virtual pinball thing curled up and died so damn quickly it wasn't even funny. I always suspected part of the appeal was rubbing your disposable income into everyone's face, and now that you can slap one together a lot cheaper nobody seems interested. So theory confirmed. Plus they all suck anyway.
-
Um... Yeah, Also Canadian. Opt is right, the further west you go the cooler we get. ;)
I also accept the nomination, with one stipulation: I don't care for drama or childish Internet political crap. I'll promise to be fair and compromise with everyone where possible. But I'm gonna be firm if anyone else wants to play games.
If this changes anyone's decision then I'm sorry. But I'm willing to work with everyone else if they are willing to with me.
-
(http://i.imgur.com/ndwsMmq.jpg)
-
The virtual pinball thing curled up and died so damn quickly it wasn't even funny. I always suspected part of the appeal was rubbing your disposable income into everyone's face, and now that you can slap one together a lot cheaper nobody seems interested. So theory confirmed. Plus they all suck anyway.
They should make you a board member PBJ, anyway have to agree with this. I used to think I wanted to build a VP, not anymore.
-
The virtual pinball thing curled up and died so damn quickly it wasn't even funny. I always suspected part of the appeal was rubbing your disposable income into everyone's face, and now that you can slap one together a lot cheaper nobody seems interested. So theory confirmed. Plus they all suck anyway.
They should make you a board member PBJ, anyway have to agree with this. I used to think I wanted to build a VP, not anymore.
He was nominated and accepted. :cheers:
-
Hahaha,
I really have zero beef with anyone here. Seriously.
Now, some of those guys on KLOV are a different story. ::)
-
He was nominated and accepted. :cheers:
(https://operationbabby.files.wordpress.com/2011/12/spittake1.jpg)
-
The virtual pinball thing curled up and died so damn quickly it wasn't even funny. I always suspected part of the appeal was rubbing your disposable income into everyone's face, and now that you can slap one together a lot cheaper nobody seems interested. So theory confirmed. Plus they all suck anyway.
They should make you a board member PBJ, anyway have to agree with this. I used to think I wanted to build a VP, not anymore.
He was nominator and accepted. :cheers:
Good.
-
I don't know why Malenko and Nephasth are conditional. These two knuckleheads should be on the board, seriously. :laugh:
-
I really have zero beef with anyone here.
(http://s2.quickmeme.com/img/11/115e87bf0ef7a4153c9f55a4d757293e94e404952e4e2892bd73b9add1dcc552.jpg)
-
I don't know why Malenko and Nephasth are conditional. These two knuckleheads should be on the board, seriously. :laugh:
Just waiting to see what happens. Here's why:
So how are we picking a new board? Post your recommendations as to who should be on the UCA board. You can't nominate yourself and if nominated you have to publicly accept - silence is not consent. If you're nominated and you accept then presto-finito you're on the board. No voting thread, no rigaramole. Donkeskis. The fate of future UCAs is in your hands. This thread is yours, rules free. Speak your mind. Prior board members can continue to serve if someone recommends them and they accept. No limit on board members.
I don't want to back out if I accept. The thing with the no limit on board members is, if there's 10 guys handling it already, there's no need for an eleventh.
-
.
-
I think we kind of reached who's going to get nominated already. I think we're good.
-
I don't know why Malenko and Nephasth are conditional. These two knuckleheads should be on the board, seriously. :laugh:
Just waiting to see what happens. Here's why:
So how are we picking a new board? Post your recommendations as to who should be on the UCA board. You can't nominate yourself and if nominated you have to publicly accept - silence is not consent. If you're nominated and you accept then presto-finito you're on the board. No voting thread, no rigaramole. Donkeskis. The fate of future UCAs is in your hands. This thread is yours, rules free. Speak your mind. Prior board members can continue to serve if someone recommends them and they accept. No limit on board members.
I don't want to back out if I accept. The thing with the no limit on board members is, if there's 10 guys handling it already, there's no need for an eleventh.
That's a facile argument. What you're saying is, "if there is work to be done, and someone else can do it, I won't."
If you're volunteering to be the board member that does nothing why even bother?
-
.
-
That's a facile argument. What you're saying is, "if there is work to be done, and someone else can do it, I won't."
If you're volunteering to be the board member that does nothing why even bother?
I guess you can read into it however you want. I run a dart league in my town. There's a lot of ins and outs and whathaveyous, but in short, it's a lot of work to run that league. And I do it alone. I don't see the UCAs needing dozens of people on the board when it can be handled by a few. Otherwise, you end up with people who don't actively participate, and then what the hell is the point of even being on the board?
-
That's a facile argument. What you're saying is, "if there is work to be done, and someone else can do it, I won't."
If you're volunteering to be the board member that does nothing why even bother?
I guess you can read into it however you want. I run a dart league in my town. There's a lot of ins and outs and whathaveyous, but in short, it's a lot of work to run that league. And I do it alone. I don't see the UCAs needing dozens of people on the board when it can be handled by a few. Otherwise, you end up with people who don't actively participate, and then what the hell is the point of even being on the board?
The board is currently at five. Seven if you and Malenko decide to join. You're right, one person can do it. I have. The board isn't there to split up the work tho, the board is there to validate certain recommendations and discard others - so it's not just one or two people deciding how the UCAs will be run. It's there to ensure the longevity of the process. Your dart league probably has a set of rules, you - as League Pres or whatever may be the guy that has to say, "we're not doing that, the rules say this" and there is probably a book or something you can reference, but for the UCAs the rules are written in the sand. That's why I think a board is a good thing, not just about splitting up who has to do some posting here and there.
-
I'm out. Thanks. :dunno
-
Anyhoo, I move that we finalize the board? Can we set a final cutoff?
-
I'm out. Thanks. :dunno
:( Well, at least that's definitive. >:D
-
Anyhoo, I move that we finalize the board? Can we set a final cutoff?
secondthirded. This was all too soon, too public, and for a group that wanted to pass on UCA, several don't seem ready to.
Maybe there are some plug-ins that help voting? This can't be there first group to do this sort of thing.
-
Anyhoo, I move that we finalize the board? Can we set a final cutoff?
This was all too soon, too public, and for a group that wanted to pass on UCA, several don't seem ready to.
Considering the only two board members with more than a post in this thread are Yots and I, one would assume you mean us. I didn't get the impression we were clinging to anything and not sure what's too soon or too public. I'm with Neph
:dunno
-
Anyhoo, I move that we finalize the board? Can we set a final cutoff?
It can cut off whenever. I recommend we wait for a final word from Malenko since he's still listed as on the fence. Once he's in or out that can be it. Tying it to the UCA voting close date was arbitrary. I didn't think this thread would get legs for a while. I also think there is a fine batch of new board members and I can't wait to see how they run the ball.
-
Shi t, I know you're not talking about me. I'm ready to have this ---maternal-smurf--- off. I just don't see a point in dragging out the nomination process for so long. I also don't see an issue with it being public. The board should be all about transparency. that's why this is being done in a manner. No one's doing any backdoor deals to get onto the board or anything like that.
-
Shi t, I know you're not talking about me. I'm ready to have this ---maternal-smurf--- off. I just don't see a point in dragging out the nomination process for so long. I also don't see an issue with it being public. The board should be all about transparency. that's why this is being done in a manner. No one's doing any backdoor deals to get onto the board or anything like that.
It's probably all aimed at BobA. BobA is a shifty sunofagun.
-
It's probably all aimed at BobA. BobA is a shifty sunofagun.
That's what happens when you have Canadians on your board. And now we're going to have two? Shazzle!
-
come on neph, lets rock this ---steaming pile of meadow muffin---
-
come on neph, lets rock this ---steaming pile of meadow muffin---
(http://i.imgur.com/hn1tCyk.png)
That's what I'm talking about right there!
-
come on neph, lets rock this ---steaming pile of meadow muffin---
You've convinced me. Let's do it. I shouldn't be listening to the detractors. :cheers:
-
come on neph, lets rock this ---steaming pile of meadow muffin---
You've convinced me. Let's do it. I shouldn't be listening to the detractors. :cheers:
That's what Im screamin!
-
come on neph, lets rock this ---steaming pile of meadow muffin---
You've convinced me. Let's do it. I shouldn't be listening to the detractors. :cheers:
YEAH!! Let's beast this UCA! :applaud:
-
Congrats, suckers.
Ladies and Gentlemen, your 2016 UCA Board.
-
Congrats, suckers.
Ladies and Gentlemen, your 2016 UCA Board.
2015*
-
Congrats, suckers.....
(http://img1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20131101025303/clubpenguinpookie/images/9/99/Wait-what-meme-rage-face.jpg)
-
On 01 March 2015 the reins of the UCAs (to include the totally baller UCA avatard) will pass to the new UCA board. They are:
Vigo
PBJ
ChanceKJ
Opt2Not
Louis Tully
Malenko
Nephasth
They're it until they're dead, or quit, or whatever.
And to close my tenure as UCA I'd just like to say that this has been your friendly neighborhood DriverMan and I invented MAME. Peace out bishes!
-
Oh ---steaming pile of meadow muffin---, I forgot about Driverman. Is it too late to nominate somebody?
-
Well we know who start sucking up too now.
LOL.
Seriously, congrats new guys!
-
.
-
Congrats to all the new members. :applaud: Being fairly new (but reading a lot more than I respond) I think this is a pretty cool board based on the fact that you did all of this out in the open. From what I have seen so far I think the right people got the nod to join.
-
Im sure PL1 will ban me before I have to do anything. :cheers:
-
Im sure PL1 will ban me before I have to do anything. :cheers:
He can't do that. You have diplomatic immunity. :cheers:
-
Ferris Bueller's Day Off ( It's Over, Go Home [ Ending ]) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QRJ38y4Jn6k#)
-
Im sure PL1 will ban me before I have to do anything. :cheers:
:laugh2:
I for one will say thanks up front to all of you.
-
Louis Tully emailed the board and requested that we pull his builds. While we wish that this wasn't the case we feel, as a board, that the best thing to do is to respect his wishes. It's not a fun decision and not one that we are remotely happy with but it is the one we felt was right. The vote tallies have been zero'd and the ballots have been adjusted. If you voted, please go vote again. If you voted for LT's stuff and wish to abstain we fully understand and support that as well.
-
Wtf? (I feel this is the appropriate response).
-
If you voted for LT's stuff and wish to abstain we fully understand and support that as well.
I did and I don't plan to redact that vote. I would have preferred you merely post in the vote threads containing his build that people should re-vote since LT doesn't want to be included but I understand why you did it your way.
-
He tried, but there was an issue with the poll where it wouldn't hide the totals. It was totally a technical issue.
-
He tried, but there was an issue with the poll where it wouldn't hide the totals. It was totally a technical issue.
ahhhh :cheers:
perhaps extend voting by a week in his categories?
-
Ill see if I can bump it a week without resetting it but if it's locked in I'm leaving it be.
-
Alright, new board members - the ball is in your court! :cheers:
-
On 01 March 2015 the reins of the UCAs (to include the totally baller UCA avatard) will pass to the new UCA board. They are:
Vigo
PBJ
ChanceKJ
Opt2Not
Louis Tully
Malenko
Nephasth
They're it until they're dead, or quit, or whatever.
And to close my tenure as UCA I'd just like to say that this has been your friendly neighborhood DriverMan and I invented MAME. Peace out bishes!
Louis Tully is no longer here.
Neph is no longer here.
I resign if Chance is involved.
So its down to Chance, PBJ, Vigo, and Opt2Not. I'll let any other board members update their statuses.
-
I'm not promising commitment, but I and not backing out for sure at this point. I still need to soul search.
I am Coke, and maybe what the UCAs need is some Pepsi: the choice of the new generation.
This would be a good opportunity for some people who are new school enough to not get that reference to join.
-
On 01 March 2015 the reins of the UCAs (to include the totally baller UCA avatard) will pass to the new UCA board. They are:
Vigo
PBJ
ChanceKJ
Opt2Not
Louis Tully
Malenko
Nephasth
They're it until they're dead, or quit, or whatever.
And to close my tenure as UCA I'd just like to say that this has been your friendly neighborhood DriverMan and I invented MAME. Peace out bishes!
Louis Tully is no longer here.
Neph is no longer here.
I resign if Chance is involved.
So its down to Chance, PBJ, Vigo, and Opt2Not. I'll let any other board members update their statuses.
I'm bowing out of this too.
-
Radical.
-
Let me get this straight -- been away for awhile -- the Mameys (with their enteraining-but-highly-opinionated-and-completely-unqualified judges and their freakish entourages) were replaced by the UCAs and, after fewer than 6 months, the membership of the 2015 UCA cabal went from 7 to 2*?
Oh ... and you let Zelko the ---smurfing--- Driverman chair the last round?
This post is made in jest. If you give in to the hate and stupidity, then Xiaou2 is right. I don't want to live in a world where the psychotic 1-inch death punch defeats beautifully-realized arcade glory. Sack up or we bring back Zakk.
-
I nominate Cheffo to replace Malenko. :duckhunt
-
Only if Xiaou2 is there with me. :dizzy:
-
Let me get this straight -- been away for awhile -- the Mameys (with their enteraining-but-highly-opinionated-and-completely-unqualified judges and their freakish entourages) were replaced by the UCAs and, after fewer than 6 months, the membership of the 2015 UCA cabal went from 7 to 2*?
Oh ... and you let Zelko the ---smurfing--- Driverman chair the last round?
This post is made in jest. If you give in to the hate and stupidity, then Xiaou2 is right. I don't want to live in a world where the psychotic 1-inch death punch defeats beautifully-realized arcade glory. Sack up or we bring back Zakk.
Naw, that was a joke. Driverman has been loooooooooooong gone...
-
So...
-
Generic Eric asked about the 2015 UCA's several days ago.
PBJ and ChanceKJ responded via PM that they were still interested. (No reply yet from Vigo. :dunno)
No idea what the rules or categories will be this year, but hopefully they will get those posted soon so people can start nominating their peers for the recognition that they deserve.
Scott
-
.
-
News item posted.